Summons against ShopClues founder in defamation case quashed

A Delhi court has quashed the summons issued against ShopClues founder Sandeep Aggarwal in a criminal defamation case filed against him by his estranged wife and company's co-founder Radhika Ghai Aggarwal.
Additional Sessions Judge Sidharth Sharma passed the order on a petition filed by Sandeep seeking setting aside of a magisterial court's May 2017 order summoning him to face trial in a criminal defamation complaint, filed by his wife.
ShopClues, an online marketplace, was founded in 2011 and valued at over USD one billion in 2016.
In her defamation complaint before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Radhika had sought Sandeep's prosecution alleging he had published certain "false, defamatory, derogatory and malicious imputations against her in print, social and electronic media, with sole motive to damage her reputation".

Advocate Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, appearing for Sandeep, had told the court that the accused was living at Gurgaon in Haryana, which was outside the jurisdiction of the magisterial court here and that it had not made an appropriate inquiry before summoning his client.
The petition was opposed by the advocate appearing for Radhika, saying that appropriate inquiry was conducted by the magisterial court before summoning the accused.

"In the order, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) has not mentioned that he is conducting an inquiry under section 202 (postponement of issue and either inquire into the case himself or direct an investigation by police) CrPC which is required to be necessarily carried out in the complaint before him as the accused is residing in Gurugram, Haryana i.e. outside the jurisdiction of the CMM, New Delhi," it said.

The sessions court also noted that the magistrate had not summoned the representatives of newspapers or websites, which had allegedly published the defamatory contents, to ascertain the publication of the articles.
"In light of above discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the mandatory requirement under provision of 202 CrPC have not been complied with in the present matter. The impugned order dated May 30, 2017 is set aside," the sessions court said.
The sessions court has now directed both the parties to appear before the CMM.